Judge: Upinder S. Kalra, Case: BC709640, Date: 2023-03-07 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: BC709640 Hearing Date: March 7, 2023 Dept: 51
Judge Upinder S.
Kalra, Department 51
HEARING DATE: March
7, 2023
CASE NAME: Parandzem Dovlatyan, et al. v. Toyota
Motor North America
CASE NO.: BC709640
![]()
MOTION
TO BE ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE
![]()
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiffs Parandzem Dovlatyan and
Aram Dovlatyan
RESPONDING PARTY(S): None as of March 2, 2023.
REQUESTED RELIEF:
1. An
order granting the application for Tim D. Newsom appear as counsel pro hac vice
TENTATIVE RULING:
1. Application
to appear pro hac vice is GRANTED.
STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:
On June 18,
2018, Plaintiffs Parandzem Dovlatyan and
Aram Dovlatyan (“Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint against Defendants Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Engineering &
Manufacturing, Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. Inc., Toyota Motor Manufacturing,
Felipe Mercado Medina, and Braulio Mercado-Guerrero (“Defendants.”) The
complaint alleges seven causes of action: (1)
Strict Liability; (2) Breach of Implied Warranty; (3) Breach of Express Warranty; (4) Negligence; (5) Negligent Entrustment; (6) Intentional Infliction of
Emotional Distress; and (7) Loss of Consortium. The complaint arises as out of motor
vehicle accident, where Plaintiff was sitting was sitting in
the front passenger seat was rear-ended by a pickup truck driven by Defendant
Mercado Guerrero Guerrero’s father, Defendant Felipe Mercado Medina, owned the
truck and was sitting in the front passenger seat at the time of the collision.
On September 9, 2018, Defendants Felipe Mercado Medina, and Braulio Mercado-Guerrero filed an
Answer.
On
November 2, 2018, Defendants Toyota Motor Sales, Toyota Motor Engineering &
Manufacturing, and Toyota Motor North America, Inc., filed an Answer.
On
November 5, 2018, Defendant Toyota Motor Manufacturing filed an Answer.
On March 19, 2019, Defendant Toyota Motor Corporation filed
an Answer.
On May 6, 2019, Plaintiffs filed an Amendment to Complaint,
Fictitious/Incorrect Name, naming Doe 2 as Adient US, LLC.
On June 14, 2019, Defendant Adient US, LLC filed an Answer.
On November 30, 2022, Tim. D Newsom, on behalf of
Plaintiffs, filed an Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice. No Opposition has
been filed as of March 2, 2023.
LEGAL STANDARD:
Pursuant
to California Rules of Court 9.40, an application for appearance pro hac
vice must
be served on all parties who have appeared
in the case and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office,
with payment of a $50.00 fee.
Additionally, the application must state:
1. The applicant's residence and office
address;
2. The courts to which the applicant has
been admitted to practice and the dates of admission;
3. That the applicant is a member in good
standing in those courts;
4. That the applicant is not currently
suspended or disbarred in any court;
5. The title of court and cause in which the
applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel¿pro hac vice¿in this state in the preceding two years,
the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted; and
6. The name, address, and telephone number
of the active member of the State Bar of California who is attorney of record.
(CRC
9.40(d).)
ANALYSIS:
Plaintiffs
move to have Tim D. Newson appear pro hac vice in the current matter. Movant
has provided all the information required under CRC 9.40(d).
Conclusion:
For
the foregoing reasons, the Court decides the pending motion as follows:
Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice
is GRANTED.
Moving party is to give notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March
7, 2023 ________________________________ Upinder
S. Kalra
Judge
of the Superior Court